122-23Ĭontroversy 2 – ‘Did Christ by His obedience satisfy for all the sins of each and every individual human being? We deny against the Papists and Arminians. Omnipresence, omnipotence, and adoration communicated to the human nature? We deny against the Lutherans.’, pp. 87-88Ĭontroversy 4 – ‘Are the properties of the divine nature such as 70-71Ĭontroversy – ‘Was man after he sinned obligated not only to punishment because of the first sin but also to perform new obedience to the law and again to punishment, if he sinned? We affirm against the Arminians. 61-62Ĭontroversy – ‘Are souls generated from parents, or is it created by God alone? We deny the former and affirm the latter against the Lutherans.’, pp. ![]() 60-61Ĭontroversy 2 over attribute 3 – ‘Is sin the meritorious or moving cause of reprobation insofar as it is a decree of God? We deny against the Arminians and others. 3-4Ĭontroversy 1 over attribute 3 – ‘Is Christ the meritorious cause of ourĮlection? We deny against the Arminians, Papists, and Lutherans.’, pp. Wesley White MTh thesis (Bern, 1676 GPTS, 2009)Ĭontroversy – ‘Does philosophy contradict theology? In other words, can the same opinion be true in philosophy and false in theology while the laws of non-contradiction are maintained? We deny against the Lutherans.’, pp. Rijssen, Leonard – A Complete Summary of Elenctic Theology & of as Much Didactic Theology as is Necessary trans. ![]() Turretin, Francis – Institutes of Elenctic Theology (P&R)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |